Learning from writing reflective learning journals in a
theory-based translation module: students’ perspectives
By Claire Y. Shih
Middlesex University
1. Introduction
1.1 What is a reflective learning journal?
Reflection is defined by Moon, one of the most well-known advocates of the use of reflective
learning journals in this country, as “a form of mental processing with a purpose and/or
anticipated outcome that is applied to relatively complex or unstructured ideas for which there is
not an obvious solution.” (1999: 23) According to Moon, one of the prerequisites of reflection is
that it should serve a purpose and have an anticipated outcome. It is used to help students to “[1]
consider the process of [one’s] own learning (metacognition), [2] critically review [their learning
materials], [3] build theories from observation and finally [4] engage in personal or selfdevelopment; or to empower themselves as individual [learners].” (ibid: 23-24) Each of these
purposes is incorporated into our series of prompt questions for students to write their reflective
learning journals in the present project (See appendix A for more details).
1.2 Reflective learning journals in translators’ education
Reflective learning journals are widely used in practice- or work-based disciplines and/or
professional education, e.g. nursing, teacher training, etc. The rationale behind this is that
students learn from reflecting critically upon their experiences or practices. The theoretical
background originates in Kolb’s (1985) famous ‘experiential learning cycle’ which involves
‘concrete experiences’, ‘reflective observation’, ‘abstract conceptualisation’, and finally ‘active
experimentation’. In other words, professionals learn through the cycle of ‘doing’ and
‘reflecting’, ‘forming principles’, ‘planning’ and finally going back to ‘doing’ (Kelly 2005: 48).
In fact, learning from experience is seen by many educators as a crucial way of narrowing the
gap between theory and practice in their respective disciplines (Bulpitt & Martin 2005: 207).
1
Nevertheless, in translators’ education, reflective learning journals are rarely adopted,
particularly at undergraduate level in higher education. One of the reasons may well be that
unlike professional translators who can reflect and draw on an abundance of daily practising
experiences, undergraduate translation students often have few practical translation experiences
to reflect upon, apart from their practical translation assignments. This is perhaps why many
undergraduate students often ask what the point of learning theories is. Many claim that surely
translation can be learned through practice alone. After all, many professional translators have
never learned translation theories in an academic context. In fact, how or whether translation
theories can really help translators to translate remains a matter of debate between the ivory
tower and the workplace (Chesterman & Wagner 2002). This action research project, however,
is not intended to focus on this debate but aims to explore the potential of writing reflective
learning journals in a theory-based translation module from students’ points of view. In
particular, it aims to describe students’ perception of (learning) translation theories and writing
reflective learning journals in learning theories.
2. The action research project
2.1 Background
Here in Middlesex University, our undergraduate translation programme’s curriculum is
organised into three strands: theory, practice and language in each academic year. The module,
‘Translation Principles and Strategies’ (coded as TRA2401) belongs to the theory strand in
students’ second year of study. This module had previously opted for essay questions either in a
formal examination setting and/or as a coursework in its assessment scheme. Since 2005/6, I
decided to introduce reflective learning journals as a part of the assessment scheme in
replacement of essay-style coursework while keeping the end-of-the-semester summative
examination intact. This is partly to support the required self-assessment elements of students’
third-year studying abroad and/or work placement modules 1 . But, more importantly, it is
designed to engage undergraduate students in learning translation theories. Students were asked
to submit four journal entries at two stages and each journal entry should be 600 words
minimum in length. Students’ consent was acquired at the end of the semester after their journal
1
It is worth providing some institutional context here. Here in Middlesex, our undergraduate translation degree is a
four-year degree where students spend their third year either studying abroad in a translation school and/or working
2
submission. They were told that their work may be quoted anonymously in a publication drafted
by the researcher. A preliminary analysis of students’ journal entries showed that a reflective
learning journal has the potential of engaging and enhancing students’ learning of translation
theories, since the evidence suggests that students take on the initiative of independent learning
and relating theories to their practice. One other important finding was that journal writing
seems to, if unintentionally, provide a platform for ‘synoptic learning’ (Gorra et al: 2008), where
students make connections between modules and consolidate their learning of translation as a
whole.
Even though a preliminary analysis of students’ journal entries in 2005/6 indicate that most
students seem to find reflective journal writing beneficial, it cannot be ignored that students’
journal entries are a part of their assessment scheme and this almost inevitably affects students’
decision about what to write in their journal entries in the first place. In other words, analysing
the contents of journal entries alone can be a fundamental drawback in validating the claim that
students are indeed benefitting from their reflective journal writing.
2.3 The present project
Hence, the present research project is designed partly to follow up and confirm that students can
really benefit from writing reflective journals in a theory-based translation module. But, more
importantly, it is designed to investigate students’ perception of (learning) translation theories by
writing reflective learning journals. As in the traditional approach to reflective learning journals
in work-based disciplines, students will have a degree of flexibility in terms of what they choose
to write in their journals; yet crucially in this research project, the use of reflective learning
journals has been adapted in such a way that students also have a list of clearly defined
guidelines. These include a series of specific prompt questions that direct students to evaluate
relevant learning materials (of their choice) and to reflect on their learning experiences as a
whole respectively (see appendix A for more details). More importantly, students are explicitly
informed about the criteria against which their journals will be assessed. In fact, a system of
assessment descriptors is developed based on Biggs’s (1993) SOLO taxonomy for this purpose
(see appendix B for more details).
in placements in a translation firm. An important part of the assessment of the third-year study is based on an
3
For the purpose of the present study, two questionnaires were designed. One was distributed in
class at the beginning of the term in 2008/09 and the other at the end of the term. Students were
clearly informed about the following:
1) Filling in these two questionnaires does not have any effects on students’ marks for their
reflective learning journals.
2) There are no right or wrong answers to these questions. They are purely designed to find
out students’ views.
3) The contents of these questionnaires will be analysed and may be cited in the present
project report. Students’ names will remain anonymous in the report. Should students
decided not to participate, they can choose to not submit the questionnaires and this will
not affect their marks or grades in any way.
In other words, students who contributed to this action research project have done so voluntarily.
Of the 39 students registered for the module, 23 submitted the first questionnaire and 18
submitted the second questionnaire. Of those students who submitted, 13 submitted both the first
and second questionnaires. However,of the 13 students who submitted both questionnaires, one
did not answer all the questions in the second questionnaire. As a result, only 12 sets of
questionnaires were analysed. This is roughly one third of the students who registered for the
module.
In the first questionnaire, three open-ended questions were asked. These questions aimed to
establish students’ perception of translation theories at the beginning of the term. The questions
were:
1) What do you think translation theories are? What have you learned about translation
theories so far?
2) Why do you think you should learn translation theories?
3) What does learning translation theories means to you? Do you like it, find it useful (if yes,
how?) or do you loathe it? Why?
extended self-assessment report.
4
The second, end-of-term questionnaire has five questions; they were designed to focus on two
themes. The first theme is to establish what students’ perception of translation theories are and
whether their perceptions have changed in any way towards the end of the term. The following
questions were asked:
1) What have you learned about translation theories so far? What does learning translation
theories means to you?
2) Has your view of translation theories changed in any way since the beginning of the term?
The second theme of this questionnaire centres around reflective journal writing. It is designed
to find out about student’s perception and experiences of writing reflective learning journals.
The following questions were asked:
3) How do you find writing reflective learning journals? Is it a difficult task to do? Or do
you enjoy writing them? Why?
4) Do you think writing reflective learning journals helps you learn translation theories in
any ways? If yes, how? If not, why?
5) Has writing reflective learning journals changed your view of learning or studying in any
way? If yes, how? If not, why?
3. Results
3.1 Pre-term questionnaire results
1) What do you think translation theories are? What have you learned about translation
theories so far?
In terms of the first question, most students describe translation theories as methods, techniques,
guidelines or strategies which they can potentially apply in their translation practices. The
following are sample abstracts of students’ statements:

‘Translation theories are basically methods of translation. I think that they can be
described as different ways of translating in [a] whole translation process.’
5

‘Translation theories [are] way[s] to help translators with their translation. It can be
known as guidelines that have been created by famous scholars.’

‘Translation theories are those theories that explain different ways to render a
translation and mistakes one must avoid when doing so.’
Interestingly, one student also mention ‘translation processes’ specifically as translation theories.

‘My opinion is that translation theories are a method of comprehending what thought
processes, conventions and restrictions (cultural or otherwise) help to shape a
translation. I have learned that translation as a process is far more complicated than it is
believed to be and that there are many factors to consider.’
Obviously, these students are only beginning their second year of studies. They may not know
many translation theories. It has to be acknowledged that the theories students have learned at
this stage of their studies may have a substantial impact on what they think translation theories
are. According to the students, the theories they had learned so far included Andre Lefevere’s
theory, Skopos theory, Nida’s formal and dynamic equivalence, etc.
2) Why do you think you should learn translation theories?
When asked why students think they should learn theories, some of them said that it is because it
helps them to solve translation problems and hopefully produce a better translation or become a
better translator. For example,

‘Personally I think translator should be aware of translation theories, as this can help
him/her to decide how to solve certain problems in translation, although translation
theory doesn't have to be applied for each translation.’

‘It is because you can learn from other translators' experience and how they have
avoid[ed] mistakes so people who wants to be a translator can be a better translator.’
Others think that translation theories help them to justify and understand their own practice. For
example,
6

‘Translation theories are useful to discuss theoretically about translation and argue why
a particular piece or part of a translation should be rejected.’

‘Because they will improve my way of translat[ing] texts and they will help me to
understand the right techniques of translation. You understand why you are translating
in a particular way instead of another way. It’s an understanding of what we are doing.’

‘Translation theories are of crucial importance for the practice of a translator because
without them it is like reaching a destination blind (producing a translation without
being fully aware the way it is being done and could have been different).’
To summarise, students’ perception of why they should learn translation theories seem largely to
correspond to their answers to the previous question where translation theories are generally
perceived as guidelines or methods for helping them to translate. As a result, a substantial
number of them indicate that they should learn theories because theories help to solve translation
problems and consequently help them to be better translators. The underlying tendency seems to
be that students value translation theories primarily, although not exclusively, because of their
applicability in producing good translation products. Nevertheless, quite a few others indicate
that theories should be learned because it helps to understand what they are actually doing as a
translator.
3) What does learning translation theories means to you? Do you like it, find it useful (if yes,
how?) or do you loathe it? Why?
Most students respond positively to this question, and indicate that they enjoy learning
translation theories and find it useful. A small minority of them, however, expressed mixed
feelings about learning translation theories. For example,

‘[I am] able to know what famous scholars see translation and also know what will
happen when a piece of text is translated into another language--e.g. see if there are any
differences between the ST and TT. If you ask me if I like learning about translation
theories it can be half I like it and half I dislike it. This is because it will be useful to see
what other translators have done in the past and I can learn from them. The other half
that I dislike about it, is because sometimes it is very difficult to understand it.’
7

‘While I find it useful for the reasons above, I personally think the theories are not gonna
to make a translation better. Plus, I do not think those theories can cover all aspects of
translation because it is mainly practical and so dependable on the context. One cannot
list all possible equivalences in a theory. That makes them general and not always
applicable.’
3.2 Post-term questionnaire results
1) What have you learned about translation theories so far? What has learning translation
theories meant to you?
A large number of students still describe translation theories as ‘guidelines’, ‘tools’ or ‘methods’
to help them to translate, although a small number of them seem to indicate that it is difficult to
put translation theories into practice. These can be seen below.

‘Translation theories are a sort of guidelines, which helped me to find solutions in
translation and made me understand the process of understanding and actually
translating. Surely I can’t use all the translation theories or a specific one in a text but it
helps to get a general idea of what’s happening in the translation.’

‘I have learned this is quite a recent field and thus there are not that many theories. On
the other hand, that means the existing theories are widely known and criticized. I do not
find translation theories useful to translate, only to analyse translation.’

‘Translation theories are a very broad subject matter and even though you might know
them, they are hard to apply. Looking at Holmes’s translation map, I realised how
comprehensive translation field is and then following different translation theories (for
example, the Bell’s translation theory), it occurred to me once they are analysed, they
are not that challenging. However, as I mentioned at the beginning [it is] hard to apply
them.…’
2) Has your view of translation theories change in any way since the beginning of the term?
All but two students responded negatively to this question. Most students say that their view of
translation theories has changed in one way or another during the term. For example, one student
indicated that she had started to question the translation practice critically on basis of theories.
8
Others seem to see translation as a strategic process where they are more aware of the potential
problems they may face and how to tackle them, etc. This can be seen in the following.

‘Yes, now I know a lot more about how translation process looks like. I have learned
about different strategies and methods to deal with potential problems that can occur
during translation and having that sort of gist about translating help me to do my
practical stuff much quicker.’

‘Yes, because during the lessons, I have learned many ways of approaching translation
and the obstacles a translator need to face.’
In terms of students’ perception of writing reflective learning journals, and its usefulness to
learning theories and learning in general, these are asked in the following three questions.
3) How do you find writing reflective learning journals? Is it difficult task to do? Or do you
enjoy writing them? Why?
Roughly half of the students seem to find writing reflective learning journals difficult; the other
half seems find it not particularly difficult. In fact, one student even mentioned that she enjoys
writing journals. A small minority of the students remains undecided about this question. For
those students who indicated difficulty in writing journals, most of them mentioned that this was
because they have not written reflective learning journals before and they were not sure what or
how to write. For example:

‘In my opinion, it is difficult as I have problems what I should include, exclude, how
theoretical, opinionated it has to be. (Relied on the practice of a translator as he has the
power to include and exclude as well)’

‘At first, I didn’t know or wasn’t sure what to write about and how, although once I
started actually realised that it's a good way of summarising and seeing my progress and
knowledge.’

‘I find it difficult to write reflective learning journals as I have not done it before and I
think my journals look like a mini-essay rather than journals. (We always write essays
than journals) and I was unclear for a long time as how to write them.’
9
4) Do you think writing reflective learning journals has helped you learn translation theories
in any ways? If yes, how? If not, why?
The majority of students agreed that writing reflective learning journals had helped them learn
translation theories in various ways. For example some indicated that writing reflective learning
journals works as a kind of revision, and some indicated that it helps or rather forces them to
read books. The following are a selection of students’ views to this question.

‘Yes, it forces me to read the books and do broad research.’

‘I think writing about what I learn helps me to understand better what I read before and
the actual writing is a way to demonstrate how good you assimilate those theories and
strategies.’

‘Yes, I do think it helps to learn translation theories as you have to learn them, read
about them and understand them before you write the journal.’

‘Yes, for me it works as revision. To write a journal I revise the materials I was given in
the lectures and it helps me to memorise things.’

‘I think yes, after all you write about how you perceive the theories and your thoughts, so
it definitely takes you further in your learning.’
As mentioned above, a few of the students remained undecided about how useful writing
reflective learning journals is. This can be seen in the following.

A bit, but not always. This is because it is like telling us to spell the word we just learned.
In class, we learn a theory but after class I have to find a book that tells me more details
about it to fully understand it.

In some ways, yes, because writing the journals has give me some insights as to how
much translation theories differ.
5) Has writing reflective learning journals changed your view of learning or studying in any
way? If yes, how? If not, why?
Roughly half of the students think that writing reflective learning journals does change their
view of learning. For example:
10

‘Yes, because the writing of journals has prompted me to consider how my thought
process works and how I study and obtain in translation.’

‘Definitely yes. Writing journals is about bringing practice and theory together. This is
difficult for me. …’

‘I think it is an interesting approach and when you become familiar with it you can
appreciate it more as a way of learning.’
Yet, quite a few are not so sure.

‘Not really. It is in a way a different form of writing and differs a lot from an essay but it
doesn’t challenge my view of learning. Or maybe? I don't know. It's a good way to revise
theory and useful to relate it with practice.’

‘Since they require a lot of extra reading, they are a help. They do not change my view
towards studying. You study by reading.’

‘Not really, because I find it is just trying to write out the whole lessons that I attended.’
4 Analysis and discussion
4.1 Students’ perception of translation theories
An interesting finding of this project is that most students see translation theories as a kind of
guidelines, methods or tools that can help them to translate, produce better translation or even
become better translators. This view largely remains unchanged when students are asked the
same question towards the end of the term. This brings out a few interesting points worth
examining. First of all, it seems that a crucial factor in judging whether a translation theory is
useful or not is determined by its direct applicability in translation practice. In other words, a
theory tends to be considered useful by students (only) if it can be applied directly in practice.
This view is not dissimilar to those of practising translators, as claimed by Wagner, ‘most
translators . . .would be happy to have some concrete advice and guidelines, even doctrines, as
long as they are practical and realistic’ (Chesterman and Wagner 2002: 4). The other point worth
mentioning is that students’ view on translation theories seems to focus on the quality of the
11
translation product. This is because when students indicate that theories should help them to
produce better translation, presumably, this means that they need to learn how to distinguish
good translation product from a bad one. This is in spite of the fact that it can be a matter of
debate in translation studies to judge whether a translation product is good or not, unless other
contextual factors are considered and/or crude errors can be identified.
Students’ view on translation theories seems to go against the current trends in translation
studies where a descriptive approach is favoured over a prescriptive one. On the one hand, we
have translation theorists thinking and claiming that we should no longer prescribe what
translators should do but describe what they do (Chesterman and Wagner 2002: 1-7). On the
other hand, we have students and perhaps practising translators who prefer to have prescriptive
theories, in the form of practical guidelines that help them to translate. Professional practitioners
may have their obvious reasons for preferring concrete guidelines so that they can use them
directly in their work. But, how about the students in the present study? They are neither
professionals nor theorists and yet they seem to have an overwhelming view both before and
after writing reflective learning journals that theories are and perhaps should be directly
applicable in practice.
One possibility is that students have only learned a very limited numbers of theories at this stage
of their study and for some reasons the theories that stuck in students’ minds are those that are
directly applicable in practice. One other reason I can think of, however, lies in the other form of
coursework which we academics tend to prescribe in translators’ education; that is, the
translation commentary, also known as translation annotation. In fact, our students are required
to write translation commentaries not only in their first year but throughout their degree.
Translation commentaries are often considered as a default way of raising students’ awareness of
translating (Williams and Chesterman 2002: 7-8) in translators’ education. In other words, it is
thought that by writing translation commentaries, students are made more aware that translation
is strategic thinking process rather than simply a mechanical task of replacing one word in
Language A with a word in Language B. Yet most academics would probably agree that good
translation commentaries in an academic context should not just consist of justification of
translation choices or merely a description of one’s translation process but include theories that
can relate to students’ justification and/or description of their translation process. Therefore,
from students’ point of view, theories that can be used directly to justify their translation choices
or to solve their translation problems and crucially be used in writing translation commentaries
12
are clearly the best and most useful ones. As for theories that are not readily applicable to
practice, they are somehow less useful and hence often overlooked. It seems that by asking
students to write translation commentaries, we have, if unintentionally, promoted the idea that
theories that do not seem to have direct applications in translation practice are less important
than those that do.
4.1.1 Students’ views at the beginning and at the end of the term
As mentioned previously, when asked to describe translation theories towards the end of the
term, most students still use the same words, e.g. guidelines, methods or tools, etc. Nevertheless,
when asked explicitly whether their view of translation theories at the end of the term had
changed in any way, the majority indicated that their views have changed in one way or another
but most of them did not specify how their views has changed apart from saying that they now
knew that they could see translation from many different angles. It is probably fair to say that
students seemed to acknowledge that they had learned something new about translation theories,
and their views of translation theories had changed in one way or another, but not fundamentally.
4.2 Students’ perception of writing reflective learning journals
In terms of how students find writing reflective learning journals, roughly half of them find it
difficult. According to these students, the reason is that they have not done this before and are
not sure how to do it. This is despite being offered a six-page guideline, four prompt questions,
two sample journal entries and two dedicated in-class sessions on how and what to write in
reflective learning journals. It seems that no amount of instruction and discussion on writing
reflective learning journals is enough unless students actually start to write their own journals. It
seems that a main difficulty of writing reflective learning journals lies in the fact that students
are given relative freedom of choosing what they want to write and reflect on, although it has to
be stressed that the other half of the students seemed not to find it particularly difficult and some
even claimed to enjoy writing reflective learning journals.
One of the aims of the present action research project is to find out the potential of writing
reflective learning journals in learning translation theories from students’ points of view. The
majority of students confirm that writing reflective learning journals help them learn translation
theories. It was indicated that this is because in order to write they have to revise what they
13
learned and read. Again, this is probably due to the fact that they are given relative freedom in
choosing what to write and what to reflect upon. This relative freedom, a new found one for
most students, poses some apparent difficulty, as mentioned before. Yet, at the same time, this
very freedom of not imposing specific theories on students forces them to scrutinise what they
have learned so far and decide what they want to read more about so that they can write
reflective learning journals. By doing that, students are actually empowered to take on more
responsibility for their own learning and encouraged to become more independent learners.
In terms of whether students feel that their view of learning has been changed by writing
reflective learning journals, there are no conclusive results. Some of them indicate that they now
know that learning is not for teachers but for one’s personal benefits, while others are not so sure
that it really challenges their view of learning since they already know that one has to learn by
reading, as indicated by one student.
5 Conclusion
This project aims to find out the potentials of writing reflective learning journals in a theorybased translation module from students’ point of view. It examines students’ perception of
translation theories during the course of the term and how writing reflective journals may have
aided their learning of translation theories and beyond. In spite of the fact that the research data
being analysed are based one third of the students who registered for this module, interesting
results are yielded. The majority of students confirm that writing reflective learning journals did
change the way they look at translation theories and consequently helped them learn translation
theories. Due to the scope of this study, no comprehensive details are available with regard to
how their views of theories may have changed. Even so, incorporating reflective learning
journals in a theory-based module still proves to be a very positive way of helping students to
learn theories. As mentioned at the beginning of this paper, reflective learning journals are
traditionally associated with practice-based disciplines only. In the present study, it is
demonstrated that the educational value of reflective learning journals can be applied and
extended successfully to a theory-based module. This may have potential implications in the
wider higher education community, especially in subject areas that are not traditionally practiceor work-oriented.
14
A somewhat unexpected finding of this project is that most students seem to think that
translation theories are guidelines, methods, or techniques that can help them to solve translation
problems. It is speculated that this may be a side effect of writing translation commentaries,
which we translation academics take for granted even though it cannot be ruled out that asking
students to write reflective learning journals may have contributed to the same effect even
though students seem to hold similar views of translation theories at the beginning and at the end
of the term. This may be a good direction for future researchers to work on. In other words, it is
very interesting to find out how and to what extent writing translation commentaries may have
an effect on students’ view of translation theories. In terms of good practice regarding reflective
learning journals, it is recommended that students should be encouraged to make connections
equally between theories, and between theory and practice. After all, a good reflective journal
can be theoretical discussion of two theories and the connection between theory and practice or a
combination of both.
15
References
Biggs, J. (1993) From Theory to Practice: A Cognitive systems approach, Higher Education
Research and Development (Australia), 12: 1, pp. 73-85
Brookfield, S. D. (1996) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Bulpitt, H. & P. J. Martin (2005) ‘Learning about Reflection from the Student’ in Active
Learning in Higher Education 6: 3, pp. 207-217
Chesterman, A. and E. Wagner (2002) Can Theories Help Translators? Manchester: St. Jerome
Gorra, A., Sheridan-Ross, J., Kyaw P. (2008) ‘Synoptic learning and assessment: case studies
and experiences’ in Proceedings of the 9th Annual HE Academy – ICS conference,
Liverpool Hope University, 26th – 28th August 2008
Jackson, B. (1998) ‘Evaluation of Learning Technology Implementation’ in Learning
Technology Dissemination Initiative, Institute of Computer based Learning
[http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/evalstudies/esevalimp.htm] Accessed 30th August 2006
Kelly, D. (2005) A Handbook for Translator Trainers. Manchester: St. Jerome
Kolb, D. (1985) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development.
Englewood Cliff, N.J.: Prentice Hall
Moon, J. (1999) Learning Journals: A Handbook for Academics, Students and Professional
Development, London: Kogan Page
Williams, J. and A. Chesterman (2002) The Map: a beginner’s guide to doing research in
translation studies, Manchester: St. Jerome
16
Appendix A
TRA2401 Translation Principles and Strategies
Coursework submission guidelines
Your journal should be submitted at the end of week 12 on a date specified by the lecturer. It
should contain 3 journal entries (600 words minimum each). Two of the journal entries should
be based on the first prompt questions (One related to the first 5 weeks of teaching and the
other related to the second 5 weeks of teaching). The third journal entry should be based on
the second, third or fourth prompt questions.
Prompt questions: You do not have to (in fact, you are not supposed to) answer every single question in
a journal entry. Use these prompt questions as a guideline.
1)
An assessment of the merits and relevance of the written materials we studied in or outside the
class. What readings, authors, theories, or concepts did you find particularly relevant for your
own work? Please say specifically what it was about these that were so meaningful? Make sure
you illustrate this with reference to specific piece of work, complete with full citations. Also,
please note the elements in your readings that you found most discrepant with your own
experiences, worst written, least convincingly argued, and most ethically suspect. Please say
specifically what it was about these elements that were so disturbing. Again, illustrate your
concerns with reference to specific pieces of work and citations.
2)
A summary of your learning in this class. What can you do now, and what do you know now,
that you could not do and did not know when you first came into this course? Also, what was
your most important realisation concerning the subject matter of the course? Why did you judge
this to be of particular importance to you? What was the most important skill you learned?
Again, what was it that was so significant about this skill? What is the primary learning that you
feel you need to undertake next time you have the opportunity to study in this area?
3)
A reflection on how your experiences as a learner in this class will affect your own practice.
What things will you do differently in your work as a result of spending these months learning
new skills and knowledge? What things have you decided you must add to your practice and
what things are you determined to eliminate, as a result of having analysed yourself as a learner
over these months?
4)
An analysis of what you feel is your strengths as a learner. What activities (in and out of class)
seemed to come easily to you, to be enjoyed, and to be well received by others? An analysis of
what you feel is your weakness as a learner. What capacities did you notice in other learners
that you wish you had? What tasks seemed to give you the greatest difficulty or to take up most
of your time? Which of your skills and capacities do you think need most work if you are to get
more out of a similar course in the future?
(Adapted from Brookfield 1996: 104-5)
17
Appendix B
How your journal will be assessed
Your journal will be assessed based on its level of reflection (Jackson 1998). Basically, it assesses how
well you can consolidate or integrate various elements, learning materials and experiences of your
learning in your journal entries. Biggs’s (1993) SOLO taxonomy is specifically adopted for this purpose.
The following table offers a brief description of Biggs’s SOLO taxonomy and its corresponding marks
developed in correspondence to the Middlesex 1-20 marking scale.
1-20 scale
1 to 4
BA
1st class
Assessment criteria descriptions (SOLO taxonomy)
Level 5 (extended abstract): the developed new structure is
flexible and competently generalised to new situations
5-8
Upper 2nd class
Level 4 (relational): the several elements are integrated coherently
in such a way that a new structure can be identified, but this new
structure is not readily generalised to new situations
9-12
nd
Lower 2 class
Level 3 (multi-structural): there are several elements present in
the representation but they are presented in poorly integrated
manner or in unrelated structures
13-16
3rd class
Level 2 (uni-structural): with only one general element taken into
account
17-20
Fail
Level 1 (pre-structural): there is no appropriate structure to the
task
18